Topic outline

  • Can it be done differently?

    Collapse all Expand all

    Can it be done differently?

    Introduction

    This activity introduces students to the question of how our economy could work as a circular economy through a different way of thinking.

    Video 1: Linear economics

    This video ends with a question: We cannot maintain this “take-make-away” model. What is the solution?

    Ask students to share their answers by writing them on the flipchart for all to see.

    Some key points regarding the workings of the economy:

    • We live in a modern, advanced, global economy that provides benefits to many people.
    • The Industrial Revolution raised the standard of living for many people around the world through mass production and consumption.
    • There are obvious downsides i
      n the video such as multiplying waste and the pressure on finite resources and raw materials despite technological advances.

     

    Video 2: Recycling

    This video ends with the question: What would need to change to make recycling work better?

    Ask your students to summarize the main points of the video to see if the video was understood.

    • Apparently recycling is useful, but it is less effective with short-cycle products 
    • such as aluminum cans and other packaging. The problem is that small losses multiply rapidly over time. In the video, we see that it will take about 14 cycles before the entire current stock of aluminum cans is in the landfill. And mind you, with our ever increasing recycle ratio, we are nowhere near 90%. We will never reach 100% recycling, so there will always be material lost. So basically, recycling is just a stay of execution.
    • Have students think further about the example – why would aluminum cans be easier to recycle than other products? Are most of the products students use simpler or more complex in composition?

     

    Video 3: Using less

    This video ends with the question: What would need to change in order to confidently start using less?

    It’s an appealing moral notion to suggest that we can all change our lifestyles and make do with a little less. But everyone’s income comes from someone else’s spending. As a result, the video indicates that less use may eventually lead to a recession.

    As with the previous video, when we look at the bigger picture, beyond the individual, you are met with surprising results. Moderation by one person is fine, moderation by all leads to problems …

    Return to the question, “What would need to change in order to confidently start using less?

    • Remember to take into account how companies operate. Is there a way to make sure the money keeps going around the system without depleting our resources? Perhaps the idea is to stop selling products and only sell how they work, for example, subscribing to a carpooling service instead of buying a car. And perhaps we could also ensure that the materials from these cars could be reused more easily.
    • Advanced question: why can it be difficult for a politician to campaign for “Use Less”?

     

    Video 4: More long lasting products

    This video ends with the question: Can products that last longer help?

    Discuss what are the challenges to making longer life products successful?

    • We want new products, but we also want to be able to use the materials and components used in them for other purposes. To keep up with the latest technology, products that are likely to become obsolete soon – such as a cell phone – will need to be designed in a way that they can be upgraded and the materials used can be easily reclaimed. Perhaps products should have a defined period of use. In other words, they are expected to get a second life with someone else and eventually the materials will be reused.
    • Products with longer lifespans may work, but there is a danger that they could lead to a decline in consumption and thus a decline in spending in the economy as a whole (affecting jobs and ultimately living standards).
    • Advanced question: what would be the effect for businesses, workers, and government if products were designed to last longer?


    Video 5: Produce more efficiently?

    This video ends with the question: What would we have to change to use efficiency as a solution?

    Introduce to the class that this question is called the “paradox of efficiency.

    • From an environmental perspective, spending more on more stuff – helped by efficiency” – is not so good if the linear, “take, make, and discard” system is still used for that stuff. Finally, in this scenario, the “stuff” is still wasteful of finite resources and has associated negative “externalities” such as environmental pollution. So the impact per unit may be less, the overall negative impact still increases.
    • But if the system were really effective – i.e., it worked well – then our stuff would be made in a way that ensures that resources can be reused over and over again. Using toxic-free materials and substances and powered by renewable energy. Efficiency within that system would be a good thing.

    Source: Forbes Note the decoupling of wages from productivity which began around 1970.

    Source: Forbes Note the decoupling of wages from productivity which began around 1970.


    From an economic standpoint, efficiency is not a problem as long as wages continue to rise along with them. Unfortunately, this is not the case in many countries with the result that loans have to close the gap between spending and income. But what happens if this credit goes away?

    What people need is income, not just lower prices. If we could design a system in which materials and resources are reused over and over again, people could sell them to each other over and over again and make money by doing so.


    Advanced questions :

    • Why would it have an overall negative effect on the environment if efficiency goes up and prices go down?
    • What is the difference between an efficient system and an effective system? And what should you actually go for?

     


    Video 6: Green?

    This video ends with the question: Although there are many green products in the right direction, what does the destination look like?

    If this question is too complicated for your class, you may want to ask the following questions:

    • What is the purpose of “green” products?
    • Do “green” products always help us achieve that goal?
    • Is it easy to make the “right” choices as a consumer?
    • Can the “green” label help us choose, or must we become experts in each product to understand their environmental and social impact?
    • Is it really fair that unless you can afford to pay more, you should choose unhealthy foods, harmful products and polluted skies?
    • What if instead we changed the system so that all products were healthy for people and the planet?
    • And how can we change the system? Well, that’s what we’re working toward….

    Advanced questions:

    • Are “green” products always good for the planet? Or are they often “less bad”?
    • Are companies being hypocritical when they make “green” products in addition to their regular products?

     


    Video 7: Fewer people?

    This video ends with the question: How can we change things to also welcome the newest members of the human race to our planet?

    The issue of controlling population growth is a tricky one. Given the projected population growth, we focus on how to welcome these new people despite the fact that they will increase demand which will ultimately consume more resources….

    Encourage students to come up with a hypothetical: if we had a system where production and consumption were benign, why would we worry about the number of people?

     

    Summarize and reflect:

    What connects all the “eco-friendly” concepts we looked at in this lesson?

    • They tend to look only at the short term, they can have negative economic effects and they are all isolated actions rather than looking at the whole system.
    • We need to bring out the longer-term perspective, in a way that is still ok economically, but in which social and environmental factors improve.
    • We could do this by learning from living systems, especially since these living systems have an impressive record of 3.8 billion years. The following video addresses this.

     


    Video 8: Learning from nature

    This video ends with the question: what are the rules for safe healthy production?

    The different elements of the lesson all convey the idea that production and consumption can be looked at in a different way. Help your class draw conclusions from the lessons by applying what they have learned and have them consider why ants may be a good model for production and consumption. And to what extent is this different from how our system currently works?

    Key points include:

    • Their biomass is larger than that of humans, but their impact on the environment is positive.
    • They are adapted to the system, i.e., all their waste is food for something else, they live off renewable energy, they are diverse in their functions, and they restore natural capital through, for example, soil reconstruction.
    • They are an effective species (not just efficient) – they ensure that the whole system thrives, but also ensure that their own species survives.

    Gain a better understanding of how both the linear and circular economies work.


    • Students understand that environmental issues can be intrinsically linked to economic issues.
    • Students learn the shortcomings inherent in some common approaches to environmental problems.
    • Students begin to explore other ways to address environmental, social, and economic problems.


    • Computer with internet connection and web browser.
    • Beamer / Smartboard

    1: Linear economics

    2: Recycling

    3: Using less

    4: Long lasting

    5: More efficient

    6: Green?

    7: Fewer people?

    8: Learn from nature

  • Towards a sustainable global economy

    Towards a sustainable global economy

    Introduction

    Model.jpgThe model depicts human activity at the center of the ecological environment. This is not to say that human activity is the center of the world. No, the human economy can only exist within the ecological environment. Thus, the economy is not separate from the environment, but exists in the ecological environment.

    The question is to what extent is this recognized in, say, the Gross National Product (GNP)? Are there indicators within the GNP that take into account the well-being of the larger system? Do we design production processes, markets, and policies that reflect the reality of interdependence?Preliminary answers to these questions can be found by examining a few other conceptual differences between sustainability and conventional models.


    1. After a brief introduction of the above model, divide the class into four working groups and ask them to choose a facilitator for their group. Each group will have 30 minutes for a discussion on one of the following topics:
      • Total cost calculation: In conventional economics, indirect or unintended effects such as pollution are considered “externalities.” For example, CO2 emissions from driving are not factored into the price of gasoline. Cleaning up waste is not reflected in the price of a consumer item, creating a hidden financing that makes them artificially cheaper. A sustainability model approaches this in a different way and attempts to quantify the external environmental and social costs using a “full cost approach.” Discuss what the true value is of these indispensable resources, so that markets will start working with more accurate price representations. What resources does an ecosystem offer? How much does it cost to replace a bunch? How much is clean water worth? How do we calculate people’s health in unhealthy or even toxic work?
      • The Commons: are resources that are accessible to all members of a group or society. Air and water are examples of “environmental commons” on which all living things depend, but which are in limited supply and/or affected by overuse. How we distribute these needs fairly and whether we can recognize them as basic rights are the policy questions surrounding “the Commons. In the old economic model, overuse of the Commons is often seen as the inevitable “tragedy” of public access. What does this mean? Sustainability also recognizes the risk of overuse and seeks policy solutions that are equitable and supportive of resources; this can be a mix of market forces, regulation, cultural norms, and community ownership. What do these look like?
      • Long-term versus short-term returns: Within sustainability, it is recognized that in the long term, the well-being of human, economic, and environmental health are interrelated in time, place, and scale. In this view, short-term actions are judged by their long-term consequences. In contrast, the old economic model tends to focus on short-term returns: profits, gross national product (GNP) or stock returns. And while these short-term measures are certainly important in a sustainability model, they do not define “success” to the same extent as in the old model. What defines success in a sustainability model? What are some short-term actions with long-term consequences?
      • Quality versus quantity (“better versus more”): Both sustainable and conventional economies are concerned with well-being. The sustainability model measures well-being through qualitative improvements in health, happiness, and satisfaction of real needs. On the other hand, the old model tends to encourage quantitative growth, with the assumption that “more” is “better.” Consider, for example, GNP: an increase in GNP is considered good news, but GNP can also increase as a result of spending on fighting crime, disease, or necessary cleanup costs after an environmental disaster. The indicator does not distinguish between favorable economic growth and “gains” from spending on negative things such as crime. Sustainability indicators, on the other hand, look at economic growth in a broader context of community and environmental well-being. What might be some sustainability indicators for this well-being?
    2. Have students create an infographic of their findings. Each student creates on an A4 a part of the infographic these are later glued together on a flipover sheet. Coordination of the group rests with the facilitator.
    3. Hang the created infographics and have students present their findings to the class.

    To examine the development, economic growth and environmental costs of the current economic system.

    Learning to distinguish between global economic development and local sustainable economic design.

    Flipchart sheets, markers, paper glue

  • Swordfish game

    Swordfish game

    Introduction

    The world’s fisheries are struggling. Overfishing, destructive fishing practices and environmental degradation take their toll. This activity helps to learn more about the limits of growth and the cooperative economy. The “Fishing Game” is a powerful simulation exercise that reveals how management policies and the “Tragedy of the Commons” affect the sustainability of the world’s fisheries.

    Create groups of four players each. Give each player a score sheet. Each person in the group fishes for swordfish in the same ocean. Give an envelope filled with fish (40 cut-out fish) to the banker (“Nature”) in each player group. The banker places 20 fish in the center of the table. Twenty fish is the carrying capacity of this ocean for swordfish.

    There are up to 10 rounds of play, each person can fish a certain number of swordfish per turn in the following ways:

    1. Harpoon fishing: take a fish.
    2. Long-line fishing: take two fish.
    3. Free-for-all long-line fishing: take three fish.

    After each round when all players have taken their fish, the banker will count the number of swordfish and add 25% to the pot, up to a maximum of 20 fish (round up).

    Example: if there are 12 fish left, 3 fish (25% of 12) are added to the pot, bringing the total to 15. (In real life, swordfish produce far less than 25% new offspring each year – they are like humans in that they have few offspring over the course of their lives.) The added fish represent the number of baby swordfish produced by the swordfish remaining after everyone has caught their fish. The goal is to have as many fish as possible after playing all 10 rounds.


    Game Instructions:

    Game 1: Everyone chooses a fishing technique at the beginning of the game and continues to use it until the end of the game.

    Game 2: Everyone chooses a fishing technique, but can change techniques each turn during the game.

    Game 3: Everyone is a harpoon fisherman and cannot take more than one fish in each round.

    Game 4: Everyone chooses a fishing technique, but can change techniques each turn during the game. At the end of each round, add 10% instead of 25%. (Still do not exceed the maximum of 20 fish)

    1. Participants will learn from their own experience what unlimited harvesting from “The Commons” can lead to.
    2. Understand the concept of nature’s carrying capacity.
    3. Have fun and reflect on how our actions affect The Commons.

    Participants will learn the importance of managing The Commons sustainably.

    Space suitable for three or four players. Printed copies of the score sheets.

    After completing the game and adding up their results, gather the participants in a circle to discuss the game.

    Questions:

    • What was “The Commons” in this game?
    • What was your strategy for fishing?
    • How many of you completed all ten rounds in each game? Why not?
    • What was your goal? (This question leads back to Mental Models we saw in earlier exercises.) How can we make the harvesting of limited resources sustainable?

    Download: Score sheet